Description of NORTHERN SUPERIOR UPLANDS Subsection Forest Resource Management Plan (SFRMP) modeling

Transcription

1 Description of NORTHERN SUPERIOR UPLANDS Subsection Forest Resource Management Plan (SFRMP) modeling Curtis L. VanderSchaaf, Forest Modeler Resource Assessment Unit Grand Rapids, MN (218) Resource Assessment Unit Forest Biometrics Report Number Fifty-One

2 2 Introduction The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has started to prepare the Northern Superior Uplands (NSU) Section Forest Resource Management Plan (SFRMP). This Plan will guide forest vegetation management for five ecological subsections in northeastern Minnesota: Border Lakes, Laurentian Uplands, Nashwauk Uplands, North Shore Highlands, and Toimi Uplands. The majority of the land cover in the NSU is identified as upland forest; low ground forest and other wetlands, shrub, and open water comprise nearly 7.4 million acres of the Section; 66% is in public ownership, 35% is privately held, and 1% is tribal ownership. State ownership in NSU accounts for 2.1 million acres or 29%. From these acres this planning process will identify Forestry and Fish and Wildlife administered lands that will be site visited and possibly assigned a treatment prescription over the next ten years (10-year stand exam list). As part of the SFRMP, landscape modeling was conducted. For this purpose, a software package called the Remsoft Spatial Planning System (RSPS) was used. Woodstock is a component of RSPS that allows users to examine how various land uses, management alternatives, and social policies will impact timber supply at a strategic-level, given the existing forest types and stand inventories. Strategic means at a large-scale, and ignores the spatial relationships between/among individual stands. Within DNR s strategic-level plans the planning horizon is 150 years but only the initial 50 years are analyzed by the NSU planning teams. For this analysis the objective function in Woodstock is to maximize discounted revenues. Since Woodstock uses linear programming to find an optimal solution when trying to maximize revenues, which is merely a mathematical operation, if no constraints are included most stands will be harvested at year 150. Of course linear programming has no concept of the future beyond the 150 year planning period. Hence, the additional 100 years helps to provide a more realistic depiction of how stands will be managed near the end of the initial 50 year period. It is felt this is advantageous to placing binding constraints (or constraints that must be met) to avoid illogical behavior 45 and 50 years into the future. Even-flows also help to avoid projected

3 3 harvesting spikes at the end of the 150 year planning period. For the part of the planning horizon that is analyzed, 10 five-year planning periods were used. In general, individual stands are not projected throughout a planning horizon when using Woodstock. Rather, stands are grouped into categories and then acres within a category (where the acres are a conglomeration of many stands) receive treatments and are projected throughout the planning horizon. For example, all stands classified as a balsam fir cover type (within FIM/CSA coded as 62), could be grouped into site qualities using an interval of 5 feet (e.g. site quality class 50 could encompass all balsam fir cover type stands with site qualities ranging from 50 to 54 feet) and then these balsam fir cover type stands grouped by site quality class would receive treatments within Woodstock and be projected forward as a group. In this case, when treatments are assigned to a category, there is no way to tell what specific stands should be treated within a particular planning period. As opposed to other optimization techniques, linear programming allows proportions of a landbase to receive treatments. For example, it could be that only 34% of aspen cover type, site index 65 stands receive a clearcut operation in a particular planning period. For other optimization techniques, such as integer programming, activities either occur or don t (either 1 or 0) in a particular planning period. Harvest scheduling does not optimize management objectives of the target forest. Rather, it is about developing an optimal activity schedule for the transition of the existing forest to the desired future forest. For many stands, individual stand management may be less than optimal so that section/subsection objectives as a whole can be met. NSU Geographic Information Systems (GIS) ARCMAP SHAPEFILE To conduct a landscape level harvest scheduling analysis, the landbase must be quantified as to the amount of cover type acres by age and site productivity and potential management restrictions/actions that can occur on those acres. The most recent DNR FIM shapefile database (05/12/2014) for the NSU was queried. Cover type is determined based on internal DNR algorithms, site index is calculated based on measurement of dominant trees within the field and appropriate equations, and age is based on field measurements. Within Woodstock, after excluding old growth stands and other stands designated as not allowing timber harvest, there is a total of 31,306 polygons totaling 620,439 acres the smallest stand acreage is 0.2 acres and the largest stand acreage is 1,812 acres. For the commonly managed timber types, this landbase only includes harvestable stands, and is referred to as timberlands (hence excludes old growth and other non-harvestable stands). Prior to conducting the analysis within Woodstock, this original dataset was manipulated to prepare it for the modeling exercise. For instance, new cover types were created (e.g. red pine plantations are

4 4 coded as 521 rather than 52 to allow for different management treatments relative to natural red pine stands which remain coded as 52). Number of acres by cover type are shown in Table 1. Table 2 shows modifications of the MN_CTYPE field for modeling purposes. Table 1. MANAGEABLE (excludes old growth and other non-harvestable acres) cover type acreages within the NSU SFRMP dataset. Code Name Number of Stands Acres 1 Ash 1,182 15,564 9 Lowland Hardwoods Aspen 8, , Birch 1,169 28, Balm of Gilead 319 4, Northern Hardwoods , Oak Oak - High Slope White Pine 572 9, Red Pine Natural 514 8, Red Pine Plantation 1,298 25, Jack Pine 1,222 23, White Spruce 284 5, White Spruce Plantation , Balsam Fir 1,037 17, Black Spruce High , BS Low , BS - Medium 1,903 32, Tamarack High 337 4, Tamarack - Low 319 6, Upland Black Spruce 377 6,094 Total 22, ,941 Non-merchantable Acreage 54 Scotch Pine Norway Spruce Upland Larch NWC 1,655 32,447 Low Productivity 75 Stagnant Spruce , Stagnant Tamarack 118 6, Stagnant Cedar ,986

5 5 Code Name Number of Stands Acres 78 Offsite Aspen Offsite Oak Red Cedar Cutover Area Lowland Grass 257 3, Upland Grass Lowland Brush 2,227 44, Upland Brush 190 2, Other Agriculture Industrial Development , Recreational Developmt Roads 208 1, Rock Outcrop 98 1, Permanent Water 422 8, Non-permanent Water , Marsh 301 5, Muskeg 254 5,087 Grand Total 31, ,439 Old-Growth Forest(OG) At the current time lowland conifer old growth acres have not been officially designated. Hence, these acres do not exist within the current GIS shapefile, do not exist on the current DNR landbase, and were not excluded from timber harvest consideration. Thus, within the model during the first planning period Woodstock assigned an old growth status to acres and this status was permanently maintained on these acres. These acres are tracked within Woodstock for a cover type separately from non-old growth (or harvestable) status using an OG designation. For upland cover types, old growth designation has actually occurred and thus these acres were deleted from the GIS shapefile and from representation within the Woodstock modeling landbase.

6 6 Table 2. For the purposes of modeling, several cover types above have been split and in some cases new cover types have been created. Creating these treatment regimes provides more realistic model outcomes. Code Name Creation Reasoning 101 Regulated Ash Created during model Regulated Lowland Hardwoods Created during model Regulated Northern Hardwoods Created during model Oak High Slope Existing, TOPO = 3 High slope Oak sites not thinned 302 Once Thinned Oak Created during model To ensure stands can only be thinned 303 Twice Thinned Oak Created during model UP TO 2 times prior to age Regulated White Pine Created during model Once Thinned Red Pine Natural Stand Created during model 252 Twice Thinned Red Pine Natural Stand Created during model 352 Three Thinned Red Pine Natural Stand Created during model 452 Four Thinned Red Pine Natural Stand Created during model 552 Five Thinned Red Pine Natural Stand Created during model 652 Six Thinned Red Pine Natural Stand Created during model To ensure stands can only be thinned UP TO 6 times prior to age Red Pine Plantation Existing, ORIGIN = 2 or Once Thinned Red Pine Plantation Created during model 523 Twice Thinned Red Pine Plantation Created during model 524 Three Thinned Red Pine Plantation Created during model To ensure stands can only be thinned 525 Four Thinned Red Pine Plantation Created during model UP TO 6 times prior to age Five Thinned Red Pine Plantation Created during model 527 Six Thinned Red Pine Plantation Created during model 71 Black Spruce High Existing, SI >= Black Spruce Low Existing, SI 23 to Black Spruce Medium Existing, SI 30 to 39 Allows for three different rotation ages for conventional runs of Woodstock 72 Tamarack High Existing, SI >=40 Allows for two different rotation ages for

7 7 Code Name Creation Reasoning 721 Tamarack Low Existing, SI < 40 conventional runs of Woodstock 161 Regulated White Spruce Created during model White Spruce Plantation Existing, ORIGIN = 2 or Once Thinned White Spruce Plantation Created during model To ensure stands can only be thinned 613 Twice Thinned White Spruce Plantation Created during model UP TO 2 times prior to clearcut 162 Regulated Balsam Fir Created during model -

8 8 Description of Yield Tables For this analysis, cover type volumes are initially estimated using covertype-specific yield tables, then average covertype species compositions (calculated using FIA/FIM data) are used to determine the amount of individual species volume harvested. Basal area, mean stand diameter, and total cordwood volume were estimated for each planning period. All equations require cover type, site index, and age. All clearcut even-aged systems were modeled using Walters and Ek forms (1993, Whole Stand Yield and Density Equations for Fourteen Forest Types in Minnesota, Northern Journal of Applied Forestry, 10:75-85) these are values basically using only FIM data from within the NSU section. Yield tables were created for the section as a whole rather than by subsection. For simplicity, all red pine and white spruce thinning operations were assumed to generate 10 cords per acre, regardless of cover type or age. All oak thinning operations were assumed to generate 8 cords per acre. For uneven-aged types (partial cutting harvests) a reduced portion of the predicted yields were assumed to represent partial cuttings. For the ash, lowland hardwood, northern hardwood, uneven-aged balsam fir, uneven-aged white spruce, and white pine cover types, it was assumed each partial cutting generates 33% of the predicted clearcut yields. For all clearcut harvests, only 95% of the expected volume (yield table estimate) was available at final harvest to reflect the current DNR practice of leaving 5% of the harvest area intact to address nontimber concerns. Desired Future Forest Conditions (DFCs) and Constraints The following values were utilized during this particular analysis (Tables 3 to 5). Table 3. Normal rotation age (NRA) by cover type. BL refers to Border Lakes, NSH refers to Laurentian Uplands, North Shore Highlands, and Toimi Uplands, and NU refers to Nashwauk Uplands. Subsection Site Type Age Aspen/BG All All 45 Birch BL All 60 Birch < 60 NSH All 55 Birch 60+ NSH All 65 Birch NU All 50 Jack Pine BL, NSH All 60 Jack Pine NU All 50 Upland Black Spruce BL, NSH All 70 Upland Black Spruce NU All 50 BSL Low All All 120 BSL Medium All All 100

9 9 Subsection Site Type Age BSL High 40+ All All 80 Tamarack Low <40 BL, NU All 90 Tamarack Low <40 NSH All 100 Tamarack High 40+ BL, NU All 60 Tamarack High 40+ NSH All 85 White Spruce BL Planted 50 White Spruce NSH Planted 75 White Spruce NU Planted 60 Balsam Fir All All 50 Red Pine BL, NSH Natural 120 Red Pine NU Natural 100 Red Pine 65+ All Planted 60 Red Pine All Planted 65 Red Pine <55 All Planted 70 Oak All All 85 Table 4. Older forest age by cover type. Site Index Age Aspen/BG All 55 Birch All 65 Jack Pine All 65 BSL Low All 125 BSL Medium All 105 BSL High 40+ All 85 Tamarack Low <40 All 95 Tamarack High 40+ All 65 White Spruce Planted 55 Balsam Fir All 55 Red Pine All 125 Oak All 90 NWC All 105 Table 5. Younger forest age by cover type. Site Index Age Aspen/BG All 30 Birch All 35 Jack Pine All 30 BSL Low All 70 BSL Medium All 60 BSL High 40+ All 40

10 10 Site Index Age Tamarack Low <40 All 50 Tamarack High 40+ All 30 White Spruce Planted 25 Balsam Fir All 30 Red Pine All 25 Oak All 35 Stands Under Development At the time of the shapefile creation, many stands were scheduled to receive some type of treatment (based on past plans), these stands are specified as Under Development within FIM. Unfortunately the exact treatment is not specified within FIM. To account for changes to the landbase from these treatments, stand ages were specified based on revised ages provided within the GIS shapefile. Potential Management Actions Given the current number of acres by cover type, site quality, and age, and desired future forest conditions and management objectives, and potential management actions that can occur, Woodstock will find the optimal management scheme of all stands to move the existing forest to the desired future forest. For any acre, there are many potential management actions that could occur and the timing of those actions can vary. It is important that potential management actions within Woodstock reflect possible operational management options and the conditions that could impact choosing one alternative over another. For instance, operationally, ABg stands are generally clear cut, and these clear-cut operations do not occur until a stand reaches age 45. There are many options for a particular stand, for instance it could be harvested at age 45 or it could be harvested at age 55. The timing of a specific operation depends on the projected yields and the desired future forest conditions. It could be that for a particular ABg stand, based on its site index, volume is maximized at age 46. However, because of age-class distribution constraints at the landscape level, the optimal time to harvest this stand is at age 54. Thus, in order to optimize landscape level management objectives, some stand-level harvested volume would be sacrificed. Table 6. Potential clearcut operations by cover type. Code Site Index (base age 50) Ages Aspen 12 All site qualities > = 45 Balm of Gilead 14 All site qualities > = 45 Birch 13 All site qualities See Table 3 Red Pine (both natural and plantation) 52, 521 All site qualities See Table 3 Jack Pine/Upland Black Spruce 53 All site qualities See Table 3 White Spruce Plantation 611 All site qualities See Table 3

11 11 Code Site Index (base age 50) Ages Balsam Fir 62 All site qualities > = 50 Black Spruce Low 710 <= 29 ft > = 120 Black Spruce Medium 711 >= 30 ft and <= 39 ft > = 100 Black Spruce High 71 >= 40 ft > = 80 Tamarack Low 721 <= 39 ft See Table 3 Tamarack High 72 >= 40 ft See Table 3 Oak 30, 301 All site qualities > = 85 For red pine, white spruce, and oak thinning regimes, at least 10, 15, and 15 years must pass before another thinning can occur, respectively. For red pine, up to 6 thinning entries can occur beginning at age 25 up to age 100, for oak up to 2 thinning entries can occur beginning at age 30 up to or before age 70, and for white spruce up to 2 thinning entries can occur beginning at age 25 before the final harvest. Table 7. Potential thinning operations by cover type. Code Site Index (base age 50) Ages Red Pine (both natural and plantation) 52, 521 >= 45 >= 25 years and <= 100 years White Spruce Plantation 611 All site qualities >= 25 years Oak 30 >= 60 >= 30 years and <= 70 years For any partial cutting (whether GROUP or REGULATED), at least 20 years must pass before another cutting can occur. Table 8a. Potential uneven-aged (partial cutting) GROUP harvesting operations by cover type. Code Site Index (base age 50) Ages Basal Area Per Acre Cords Per Acre Ash 1 >= 45 All >= 85 >= 15 Lowland Hardwoods 9 >= 45 All >= 80 >= 21 Northern Hardwoods Young 20 All site qualities >= 26 years and <= 55 years >= 90 - Northern Hardwoods Old 20 All site qualities >= 56 years >= White Pine 51 All site qualities >= 125 years - - White Spruce 61 All site qualities >= 80 years - - Balsam Fir 62 All site qualities >= 50 years - -

12 12 Table 8b. Potential uneven-aged (partial cutting) REGULATED harvesting operations by cover type. Cover Type Code Site Index (base age 50) Ages Ash 101 All site qualities All Lowland Hardwoods 109 All site qualities All Northern Hardwoods 120 All site qualities All White Pine 151 All site qualities All White Spruce 161 All site qualities All Because of ecological concerns, we assumed no harvesting of northern white cedar stands. Due to low acreages, there are no management actions in Scots pine, Norway spruce, upland larch, and red cedar cover type stands. Due to low productivity and therefore relatively high logging costs per unit harvested, stagnant spruce, stagnant tamarack, stagnant cedar, offsite aspen, and offsite oak have no management actions. Average Percent Species Compositions To estimate individual species volumes, average percent species compositions were obtained by cover type. A combination of USDA Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) and FIM data were used. Merchantable volume (as opposed to say total volume or basal area) was used to determine percent species compositions. Lowland Conifer Designation For scenarios requiring a certain amount of forest to be specified as old growth, acres were permanently assigned during the first period. Hence, these acres were removed from the harvest pool. Conversion Actions There were two different sets of cover type conversion goals identified to be achieved through forest management. One set considered the implications of climate change on cover type management goals while the other set specified conversion goals without consideration of climate change, to support other forest management directions such as conversions for wildlife habitat. The implications of climate change on cover type management and covertype conversion is a newly introduced management action into the SFRMP process, whereas conversion to support wildlife habitat has been a management action found in past SFRMPs. Tables 9 through 13 identify factors and percentages used in modeling the conversion actions. Table 9 identifies the modeled change in cover type acres based on past SFRMPs but modified for potential climate change. These reflect realistic percentages given the actual historic conversions proposed in past plans.

13 13 Table 9. Percent change in cover type acres achieved through clearcutting over the next 50 years FOR THE CLIMATE CHANGE SCENARIO. Percentages are cumulative. Site Index 10-Year 20-Year 30-Year 40-Year 50-Year Jack Pine All % >= % >= % >= % % Aspen/BG All % Birch All % BS High All % >=-7.936% >=-7.936% >=-7.936% % BS Medium All % >=-7.936% >=-7.936% >=-7.936% % BS Low All % >=-7.936% >=-7.936% >=-7.936% % BF All % >=-7.936% >=-7.936% >=-7.936% % WS Natural All % >=-7.936% >=-7.936% >=-7.936% % WS Planted All % >=-7.936% >=-7.936% >=-7.936% % Table 10 identifies the percent change in cover type acres which may be pursued to accommodate other conversion goals such as for wildlife habitat. These percentages are viewed as aggressive, not particularly achievable but are intended to show how changes in conversions compare among the scenarios. Table 10. Percent change in cover type acres achieved through clearcutting over the next 50 years FOR THE SCENARIOS NOT CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHANGE. Percentages are cumulative. Site Index 10-Year 20-Year 30-Year 40-Year 50-Year Aspen All -5.0% -10.0% -15.0% -20.0% -22.0% Balm All -5.0% -10.0% -15.0% -20.0% -22.0% Birch All -5.0% -10.0% -15.0% -20.0% -22.0% When considering potential climate change impacts (refer to Table 9), the following transitions of cover types are assumed: Table 11. Cover type transitions by decade. Site Index 10-Year 20-Year 30-Year 40-Year 50-Year Aspen All % Birch All 8.441% Balm All 1.310% White Pine All 7.169% % % % % Red Pine Natural All 6.318% % % % % Red Pine Planted All % % % % % N Hardwood All % % % % Oak All % % % %

14 14 For the conversion goals not accounting for climate change (refer to Table 10), percent of acres transitioning to other cover types differs whether a conversion is obtained through a clearcut operation or not. For conversions obtained through operations other than clearcutting (Soft Conversion), the following percent transitions are assumed: Table 12. Soft conversion transition percentages. Site Index 10-Year Balsam Fir All 25.0% White Spruce Natural All 25.0% White Pine All 50.0% For conversions obtained through clearcutting (Hard Conversion), the following percent transitions are assumed: Table 13. Hard conversion transition percentages. Site Index 10-Year 20-Year 30-Year 40-Year 50-Year Jack Pine All 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% White Spruce Natural All 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% Balsam Fir All 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% Red Pine Planted All 17.0% 17.0% 17.0% 17.0% 17.0% White Pine All 17.0% 17.0% 17.0% 17.0% 17.0% NWC-Upland All 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% Stumpage Prices by Species Revenues per cord of harvested wood are presented below. For several species a blended pulpwood/bolt/sawtimber price was used. This was obtained by multiplying the per cord stumpage revenues associated with pulpwood exclusively, bolts/pulpwood, and sawtimber times their reported cords to produce a weighted-average cord revenue. Examples are provided for aspen, red pine, and birch. A 3% interest rate was used when discounting stumpage revenues.

15 15 Table 14. Prices per cord of harvested wood. Applies to all scenarios. Prices are from the 2013 Public Stumpage Price Review for DNR Forestry ( The exceptions being Red Oak, White Oak, and NWC which were provided by Don Deckard, DOF Forest Economist. Stumpage Price Per Cord of Pulpwood Blended Stumpage Price Per Cord of Bolts/Pulpwood/Sawtimber Real Price Adjustment (1) Species Trembling Aspen $ Largetooth Aspen $ Balm $ Paper Birch - $ Basswood - $ Red Oak (2) - $40.00 Y White Oak (3) - $30.00 Y Maple (4) - $ Ash (5) - $ Elm (6) - $ Balsam Fir - $ Black Spruce $ Jack Pine - $27.70 Y Red Pine on non-rp cover types (7) - $41.84 Y Tamarack $ White Pine - $44.12 Y White Spruce - $19.46 Y White-cedar (8) $ Table Notes: (1) For planning purposes, designated species increase in real terms at 0.5% per year. (2) Includes black oak. (3) Includes bur oak. (4) Sugar and red maple. (5) Black, green, and white ash. (6) Includes American elm, red elm, black cherry, butternut, pin oak, hackberry, hickory, silver maple, cottonwood, willow, and misc. (7) For red pine cover type, use red pine price table by age and silvicultural treatment. (8) Includes northern white and eastern red cedar.

16 16 $0 per Sawtimber cord *0 cords+$0 per Pulp and Bolt cord*0 cords+$24.97 per pulpwood cord*400,759.1 cords Aspen Blend = 0.0 cords+0.0 cords+400,759.1 cords = $24.97 per cord $ per Sawtimber cord *1,496.2 cords+$41.54 per Pulp and Bolt cord*52,880.8 cords+$13.50 per pulpwood cord*3,080.2 cords Red Pine Blend = = $41.84 per 1,496.2 cords+52,880.8 cords+3,080.2 cords $0 per Sawtimber cord *0 cords+$16.98 per Pulp and Bolt cord* cords+$7.45 per pulpwood cord*20,446.4 cords Birch Blend = = $10.19 per cord 0.0 cords cords+20,446.4 cords Table 15. Prices per cord of red pine harvested wood ON RED PINE COVER TYPES. Applies to all scenarios. Age Stumpage Price per Cord Stumpage Price per Cord Thinning harvest Clearcut harvest 30 $ $ $32.00 $ $40.00 $ $45.00 $ $50.00 $ $50.00 $ $50.00 $ $ $ $ $ $75.00 These prices reflect that a thinning at age 30 will generally only contain pulpwood, but with age the percent bolts (or small sawlogs) will likely increase; at older ages thinnings may even remove smaller sawlogs. For clearcuts, as age increases, the percentage of bolts and sawlogs will increase, but at some point a percentage of the tree diameters will become too large for current mill specifications, thereby eliminating the potential to sell that timber.

17 17 Even Flows Even-flows by cover type provide a target relative range of harvested volume over the next 150 years, and represent the stability of harvested volumes. Quantifying the average amount of harvested volume and the likely variations from that average over the next 150 years provides industry some idea of the amount of fiber available for the production of primary wood products (e.g. pulpwood for oriented strand board and paper/pulp production and sawlogs for lumber, pallet, and veneer production) and even the production of secondary wood products. Factors such as the rotation ages and yield tables (predicted volumes) all play an important part in estimating even-flows and their variation around the long-term average harvested volume. A greater percent even-flow allows for more flexibility as to the timing of harvests across the landscape and will likely result in slightly greater average harvested volumes. However, the greater average harvested volumes across time may result in periods of excessive supply and demand that could negatively impact the forest industry. Figure 1. Example of a 15% even flow effect on harvested volume over time Cords Harvested Years In the Future In the figure above, the average volume of wood harvested over the next 50 years is 800,000 cords. An even-flow constraint of 15% was utilized. Hence, in any one year, the amount of harvested volume could deviate +/- 15% from the average harvest of 800,000 cords. Greater percent even-flows allow for more flexibility in choosing stands to harvest across time to meet desired future conditions (DFCs); this will generally result in a greater average harvested volume. However, greater percent even-flows result in more variation in the amount of harvested volumes from year to year which could negatively impact the forest industry.

18 18 SCENARIO MODELING To address the variety of interests related to Minnesota DNR land management, four different scenarios were developed. These four scenarios use the same rotation ages, stand density management, and revenues but differ in their desired future conditions (DFC) for lowland conifer old growth (LCOG), even-flows of harvested volume, conversion goals (see Tables 9-13), and in their older forest goals. If a section planning team identified that existing forests may not provide enough older forest in the future ACROSS ALL OWNERSHIPS WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THAT SECTION then the team could propose that purposeful management should be conducted on DNR LANDS to produce sufficient older forest in the future. The NSU section team identified certain cover types within particular subsections that may require management to produce additional older forest. The reader must be cautioned that the value of these modeling scenarios is not in determining final numbers, volumes, or dollars; or to produce absolute numbers that will be used as targets in future management. Rather the intended value of this modeling exercise is in comparing how a mix of parameters in one Scenario results in outputs relative to outputs of other Scenarios with different combinations of parameters. Table 16. Percent Lowland Conifer Old Growth (LCOG) percentages. Code Site index (base age 50) A B C D Black Spruce Low 710 <= 29 ft 10% 5% 10% 1.5% Black Spruce 711 >= 30 ft and <= 39 ft 10% Medium 5% 10% 1.5% Black Spruce High 71 >= 40 ft 10% 5% 10% 1.5% Tamarack Low 721 <= 39 ft 10% 5% 10% 1.5% Tamarack High 72 >= 40 ft 10% 5% 10% 1.5% Northern White Cedar 73 All 10% 5% 10% 1.5%

19 19 Table 17. Even-flow of harvested volume across all cover types and species, and also by individual cover type. Cover Type Code Site index (base age 50) A B C D All cover types - - 5% 20% 40% 40% ABg 12, 14 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Birch 13 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Jack Pine/Upland Black Spruce 53, 74 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Black Spruce Low 710 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Black Spruce Medium 711 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Black Spruce High 71 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Tamarack Low 721 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Tamarack High 72 All 5% 20% 40% 40% White Spruce Plantation 611 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Balsam Fir 62 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Red Pine (Natural) 52 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Red Pine (Plantation) 521 All 5% 20% 40% 40% Table 18. Older forest percentages. BL refers to Border Lakes, NU refers to Nashwauk Uplands, NSH refers to North Shore Highlands, TU refers to Toimi Uplands, and LU refers to Laurentian Uplands. Code Subsection A B C D ABg 12, 14 NU 12.0% 6.0% 12.0% 0.0% Jack Pine/Upland Black Spruce 53, 74 NU 12.0% 6.0% 12.0% 0.0% Jack Pine/Upland Black Spruce 53, 74 NSH 9.0% 4.5% 9.0% 0.0% Jack Pine/Upland Black Spruce 53, 74 TU 9.0% 4.5% 9.0% 0.0% White Spruce Planted 611 BL 10.0% 5.0% 10.0% 0.0% White Spruce Planted 611 TU 10.0% 5.0% 10.0% 0.0% White Spruce Planted 611 NU 10.0% 5.0% 10.0% 0.0% White Spruce Planted 611 LU 10.0% 5.0% 10.0% 0.0% White Spruce Planted 611 NSH 12.0% 6.0% 12.0% 0.0% Black Spruce Low 710 NSH 10.0% 5.0% 10.0% 0.0%

20 20 Table 19. Summary of Desired Future Conditions (DFCs) for the four Scenario models. Where CC Response refers to the use of conversion goals taking into consideration climate change and Original SFRMP does not consider climate change when specifying conversion goals. SFRMP Modeling Scenarios Parameter Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Even Flow Tight 5% Moderate 20% Relaxed 40% Relaxed 40% LCOG Designation High 10% Moderate 5% High 10% Low 1.5% Change Climate Change Response Original SFRMP Original SFRMP No Change Older Forest (if needed for certain s) More Some More None SCENARIO MODEL OUTPUTS Figure 2. Estimated harvested cords by scenario and five-year projection period across all cover types and species. 200, , ,000 Cords Harvested 140, , ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 A B C D Years Into the Future

21 21 Figure 3. Estimated ASPEN and BALM-of-GILEAD SPECIES harvested cords by scenario and five-year projection period across all cover types. 70,000 60,000 Cords Harvested 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 A B C D Years Into the Future Figure 4. Estimated BIRCH SPECIES harvested cords by scenario and five-year projection period across all cover types. 16,000 14,000 Cords Harvested 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 A B C D 2, Years Into the Future

22 22 Figure 5. Estimated JACK PINE SPECIES harvested cords by scenario and five-year projection period across all cover types. 9,000 8,000 7,000 Cords Harvested 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 A B C D Years Into the Future Figure 6. Estimated RED PINE SPECIES harvested cords by scenario and five-year projection period across all cover types. 40,000 35,000 Cords Harvested 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 A B C D 5, Years Into the Future

23 23 Figure 7. Estimated BLACK SPRUCE SPECIES harvested cords by scenario and five-year projection period across all cover types. 16,000 14,000 Cords Harvested 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 A B C D 2, Years Into the Future Figure 8. Estimated DISCOUNTED ANNUAL REVENUES over the next 10 (gray) and 50 years generated from harvested cords by scenario. A 3% interest rate was used. 120,000,000 Discounted Stumpage Revenues (3% Interest Rate) 100,000,000 80,000,000 60,000,000 40,000,000 20,000,000 A B C D 90,942,460 96,244,530 99,876, ,672,210 28,459,780 29,825,910 34,324,465 34,834,445 0

24 24 Figure 9. Percent Older forest of lowland conifers (includes Tamarack, Black Spruce, and NWC cover types) by scenario. (See Table 4, page 9, for definition of Older forest age by cover type). 100% 90% Percent Older Forest 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% A B C D Years Into the Future

25 25 Figure 10. Percentage of older upland conifer forest. Includes Red Pine Natural, Red Pine Plantation, Jack Pine, White Spruce Plantation, and even-aged Balsam Fir cover types, by scenario. (See Table 4, page 9, for definition of Older forest age by cover type). 100% 90% Percent Older Forest 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% A B C D Years Into the Future

26 26 Figure 11. Percentage of older upland hardwoods forest (includes Aspen, Balm, Birch, and Oak cover types) by scenario. (See Table 4, page 9, for definition of Older forest age by cover type). 100% 90% Percent Older Forest 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% A B C D Years Into the Future

27 27 Figure 12. Percentage of younger lowland conifer forest (includes Tamarack and Black Spruce cover types) by scenario. Due to the lack of final harvest northern white cedar, younger forest of that type was not included. (See Table 5, page 9, for definition of Younger forest age by cover type). 100% 90% Percent Younger Forest 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% A B C D Years Into the Future

28 28 Figure 13. Percentage of younger upland conifer forest (includes red pine (natural), red pine (plantation), jack pine, white spruce (plantation), and even-aged balsam fir cover types) by scenario. (See Table 5, page 9, for definition of Younger forest age by cover type). 100% Percent Younger Forest 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% A B C D Years Into the Future

29 29 Figure 14. Percent younger forest of upland hardwoods (includes Aspen, Balm, Birch, and Oak cover types) by scenario. (See Table 5, page 9, for definition of Younger forest age by cover type). 100% Percent Younger Forest 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% A B C D Years Into the Future

30 30 Table 20. Percent older forest by scenario and cover type and cover type grouping. Lowland conifers includes Tamarack, Black Spruce, and northern white cedar (NWC) cover types, Upland conifers includes Red Pine Natural, Red Pine Plantation, Jack Pine, White Spruce Plantation, and even-aged Balsam Fir cover types, and Upland hardwoods includes Aspen, Balm, Birch, and Oak cover types. (See Table 4, page 9, for definition of Older forest age by cover type). Current Years Into the Future A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B Abg 16% 16% 16% 16% 5% 5% 2% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 1% Birch 65% 65% 65% 65% 50% 54% 50% 47% 35% 39% 32% 28% 22% 25% 21% 18% 9% 12% 9% 7% 0% 1% Jack Pine 23% 23% 23% 23% 14% 10% 10% 4% 4% 1% 1% 0% 8% 2% 2% 2% 11% 1% 1% 0% 13% 1% WS Plantation 6% 6% 6% 6% 17% 15% 16% 15% 36% 34% 37% 33% 48% 50% 53% 49% 56% 39% 43% 35% 64% 31% Balsam Fir 39% 39% 39% 39% 29% 26% 22% 27% 23% 11% 9% 10% 14% 6% 6% 8% 4% 0% 0% 1% 10% 3% BS High 32% 32% 32% 32% 35% 29% 28% 27% 36% 25% 23% 20% 40% 24% 24% 17% 39% 19% 20% 13% 37% 13% BS Medium 22% 22% 22% 22% 27% 23% 22% 20% 30% 21% 20% 16% 35% 20% 18% 13% 38% 19% 18% 13% 38% 16% BS Low 23% 23% 23% 23% 25% 22% 21% 19% 27% 22% 20% 16% 27% 19% 16% 11% 31% 18% 16% 10% 34% 17% Tamarack High 41% 41% 41% 41% 35% 32% 31% 28% 33% 27% 26% 20% 30% 23% 25% 18% 27% 20% 23% 15% 23% 16% Tamarack Low 34% 34% 34% 34% 34% 33% 32% 30% 37% 33% 32% 27% 35% 28% 26% 20% 32% 25% 23% 18% 28% 22% Red Pine (all) 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Lowland Conifer 43% 43% 43% 43% 48% 44% 43% 42% 51% 43% 42% 40% 55% 42% 41% 39% 57% 41% 40% 38% 58% 39% Upland Conifer 16% 16% 16% 16% 12% 11% 10% 9% 10% 8% 8% 8% 12% 9% 10% 10% 12% 6% 6% 7% 12% 5% Upland HW 22% 22% 22% 22% 10% 11% 8% 7% 6% 6% 4% 4% 5% 4% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 0% 2% 1%

31 31 Table 21. Percent younger forest by scenario and cover type and cover type grouping. Lowland conifers includes Tamarack and Black Spruce cover types, Upland conifers includes Red Pine Natural, Red Pine Plantation, Jack Pine, White Spruce Plantation, and even-aged Balsam Fir cover types, and Upland hardwoods includes Aspen, Balm, Birch, and Oak cover types. (See Table 5, page 9, for definition of Younger forest age by cover type). Years Into the Future Current A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A Abg 66% 66% 66% 66% 63% 60% 66% 69% 63% 59% 63% 68% 60% 55% 58% 65% 61% 63% 56% 60% 64% Birch 27% 27% 27% 27% 45% 41% 45% 48% 61% 57% 63% 68% 71% 68% 73% 75% 56% 50% 56% 58% 51% Jack Pine 48% 48% 48% 48% 40% 54% 55% 56% 41% 61% 62% 54% 33% 63% 63% 52% 46% 59% 57% 45% 41% WS Plantation 43% 43% 43% 43% 29% 28% 27% 29% 6% 13% 11% 15% 13% 14% 12% 14% 25% 40% 38% 44% 24% Balsam Fir 35% 35% 35% 35% 42% 50% 53% 47% 53% 72% 75% 72% 54% 72% 74% 69% 50% 64% 60% 59% 56% BS High 37% 37% 37% 37% 38% 45% 47% 48% 39% 53% 55% 58% 35% 55% 55% 62% 13% 45% 44% 50% 12% BS Medium 43% 43% 43% 43% 41% 48% 48% 51% 38% 52% 53% 57% 36% 58% 60% 65% 34% 61% 62% 67% 27% BS Low 41% 41% 41% 41% 40% 45% 46% 48% 38% 49% 51% 55% 33% 49% 52% 56% 28% 51% 53% 59% 24% Tamarack High 35% 35% 35% 35% 41% 43% 44% 47% 42% 48% 49% 55% 35% 41% 40% 47% 33% 37% 33% 37% 34% Tamarack Low 36% 36% 36% 36% 38% 40% 41% 43% 38% 42% 43% 48% 42% 49% 51% 57% 46% 52% 54% 60% 42% Red Pine (all) 47% 47% 47% 47% 45% 42% 44% 40% 41% 32% 30% 21% 39% 31% 27% 15% 36% 33% 29% 20% 37% Lowland Conifer 28% 28% 28% 28% 27% 32% 32% 34% 26% 34% 35% 39% 23% 36% 37% 42% 19% 36% 36% 41% 16% Upland Conifer 44% 44% 44% 44% 41% 45% 46% 44% 37% 46% 46% 39% 35% 47% 46% 36% 38% 49% 46% 38% 39% Upland HW 61% 61% 61% 61% 61% 58% 63% 66% 63% 59% 63% 68% 61% 57% 60% 66% 61% 61% 56% 60% 63%